By Jack D. Young
I wonder how many Proxiblog readers have heard of the term “Pickle Barrel large cent”? Let’s check with AI about the definition:
These large cents, minted between 1793 and 1857, were significantly larger than regular pennies. Legend has it that people would throw these coins into pickle barrels to create a deeper green on their pickles. The acidic solution caused the coins to develop green and blue-green patina.
“Google” the term to learn more!
Now that we explained that, on to the star of this post, a TPG certified “mint error” 1853 Large Cent. And unlike many I document in this series, maybe not technically a counterfeit unless attempted to be sold as stated on the label.
Image from NGC’s on-line cert site
This was pedigreed from the “Mervis Collection,” a huge collection of US large cents. This particular coin is documented sold through the Heritage 2014 FUN “Signature Auction,” which included 879 lots with both PCGS and NGC certified coins. And the coin description according to Heritage:
Images courtesy HA on-line auction archives
A difference of opinion between the TPG and the Auction House isn’t unusual in my opinion.
NGC describes it as an 1853 obverse half of split planchet and a mint error, while HA states it is the resulting reverse half from when the coin split after striking and separated during circulation. HA also cites the weight as 13.48 grams–what, with the holder? (Actually that is the original weight of 1793 through 1795 thick planchet cents.)
Regardless they both see it as part of a split planchet; fortunately, NGC recorded the weight as “6.7 g”, with the standard weight of an 1853 cent at 10.89, so a little more than a half of a cent.
What is this article about then, apart from a disagreement between two experts? Remember the pickle barrel? I sent images of one as well as posted on a couple of forums, inquiring if the split planchet “theory” made sense.
A friend and early copper dealer (the one who owned this coin recently) described it as “just a pickled coin; it was let to sit in vinegar which caused the obverse and part of the reverse to corrode that way.”
Three other early copper experts all stated acid etched, acid and/ or a pickle jar coin.
My two error experts went on record. One stated that the coin shows no striation signs of a split planchet. “I’ve never known a split-after-strike error to leave a coin with radial striations,” he said. “It looks altered to me.”
My go-to early copper friend stated:
“This looks like a classic example of a ‘pickle’ cent. Sat obverse side down in a barrel of pickles. The vinegar acid etches the down side much more than the top side. The radial lines are created by the bubbles that slowly move from the center of the bottom side (obverse in this case). Supposedly copper cents were used this way to create a bright green color on the pickles. Might be bullpucky but I wasn’t there when this was done.”
Fact is, any prolonged mild acid bath will have a similar effect on a cent. I have seen dozens over the past 60 years.
But to the point. I looked to other EAC Members to offer images of others so “processed.”
A friend offered the following image of his:
A friend’s image of his example appears above. (Guess which one!)
Now his comment: “I didn’t bother with photo of reverse but it’s about the same as obverse. Notice the ridges near the denticles, a sign of acid erosion.”
And while researching information for this article I ran across another apparent example in a forum I frequent.
Notice the obvious size difference compared to an 1852 example. AND, the radial lines emanating from the center!
So, what about an actual “split planchet”? Well, NGC wrote an article about them:
Images from the NGC on-line article
And from a prominent early copper dealer’s listing as a “split planchet”:
And one more off the Bay:
Current eBay listing as an “obverse split planchet error
And I do NOT see any of the radial striations on any of these actual split planchet examples!
So, with subject coin now in-hand, I would like to start with the specifications for a “normal” example from PCGS CoinFacts:
PCGS CoinFacts image of 1853 large cents
And again, 10.89 grams standard weight for the series and a diameter of 27.50 mm.
And the subject coin’s diameter? Well, I think the following image is visually pretty telling:
Subject example on the left, a “normal” 1851 NGC certified large cent on the right
The subject example scales at approx. 25 mm versus the standard of 27.50. As a friend stated, “shrunk,” NOT split…
I do wonder what the TPG was looking at during certification! Maybe the flip envelope accompanying the coin?
The TPG was notified of my findings on May 2, 2025. So far, no change to the on-line cert by their “error expert.”
Stay tuned.
If you like posts like this, please go to Jack Young’s page on Proxiblog. Also, please subscribe so you can get our weekly newsletter and be informed whenever there is a new article or column.
Proxiblog also has thousands of followers on Facebook Coin Groups, YouTube and social media. To get the latest discussion and commentary, be sure to friend us by clicking here.
You can find more information about errors and varieties as well as buying and bidding on coins in Coin News Updated: The Essential Guide to Online Bidding. Please consider purchasing the work for yourself or a friend, as it underwrites this hobbyist website. Thank you.
NGC updated the cert to “Contact Customer Service”…